In an article in Hold the Front Page, the charity Public Concern at Work lambastes the Government’s plans to change the freedom of information law as “financially flawed and politically incoherent”.

Using the Government’s own figures, they calculate that it will cost more than £12m to introduce the restrictions. The charity used the Government’s estimate that it costs officials between £1 and £2 to read a single page. That would mean a total cost of £7.2m for one official in each of the 100,000 public bodies to read the new rules and guidance restricting FOI requests and a further £5m for them to think about them.

I love the charity’s point about the time reporters have to spend reading the copious press releases (read propaganda) spewed out by the bloated press and PR offices of Government. If reporters charged £1 a page for reading and trying to sift through all that spin, then politicians would think quite differently I’m sure.

Of course, what the Government’s estimated FOI costs don’t show is the massive savings resulting from FOI. Guy Dehn, the charity’s director, said:

“While it is clear that freedom of information deters waste, inefficiency and fraud across the public sector, all these benefits have been ignored in these proposals. The Government needs to go back to the drawing board and carry out a proper cost-benefit analysis.”

Following on from yesterday’s post, I came across this interesting article in the Register describing the first-ever sale of detailed digital maps of the UK created by Russia’s KGB between 1950 and 1990.

What’s interesting is that the KGB maps are more detailed than the OS maps because they are not censored. The KGB came up with the maps using satellites and spies on the ground. Even so, that hasn’t stopped the greedy and aggressive OS from claiming copyright over the maps. The OS alleges the Soviets ‘adapted’ the maps from OS material.

Hmm…English mapping nasties versus the KGB? Never thought I’d be cheering for the Russian secret service.

Most people would except that if they hand over money, they will get something in return. That’s not the case when it comes to the British taxpayer and the data his or her taxes have paid to create. In that case, you get nothing for your money. Even worse, you have to pay twice, three times, sometimes even a dozen times to access the data your taxes have paid for.

I bring this up after a particular case has come to my attention involving the Ordnance Survey. Be aware that the OS was created at taxpayer expense and for most of its life was entirely supported by the taxpayer. Then Gordon Brown decided to label it a ‘trading fund’ which basically means that it must charge for its services. But guess who its main customers are – other public bodies! So public money is simply being recycled all the while the public get nothing for their money.

Andy Wightman needed OS data for his project Who Owns Scotland?. He was trying to figure out…well who owned Scotland. Land ownership is still an incredibly secretive affair in the UK, and Andy was trying to shed some light on the land ownership of Scotland for the benefit of the public. For several years, he had a deal whereby he was able to use OS data for a reduced rate – but he still paid more than £4000! Then in October 2004, the OS sent him a letter stating he was violating Crown Copyright and ordered him to take down all his maps. How can you describe land ownership without maps? Andy went back to the OS and explained that he did, in fact, have a license. That was fine for awhile, but then the OS came back later in an even more aggressive manner. You can read the full story on the Who Owns Scotland website.

This case highlights a serious problem in the way the UK manages public information. Crown Copyright restricts access to public information. It is the primary reason that the UK and Europe (which operates a similar system) falls so far behind America’s information economy. All American public information belongs to the public, whereas Crown Copyright means politicians and bureaucrats ‘own’ public information rather than the public who paid for it.

In the expanded version of Andy’s story, he discusses the implications of Crown Copyright and, in particular, the important issues raised about how OS licenses its data, derives data, customer care, and a much wider issue of access to publicly-funded data in the UK.

Ordnance Survey is increasingly acting like a big business, but it holds a monopoly position based on its taxpayer-funded resources. Ordinary citizens cannot use the data that their taxes have paid for; the only people who benefit are corporations (who can afford the fees), universities (whose staff can get access) and public sector organisations. Any ordinary citizen who wants to do geographic research or analysis is, as Andy says, stuffed.

No wonder Google Maps is taking over the world!

Does anyone actually believe the government’s stated reason for curtailing the public’s right to know?

What wastes time and money is vague, ambiguous and unenforced legislation (like so many New Labour laws). That is the problem with the current Freedom of Information Act. And rather than make the law more concise, precise and enforced, this government wants to introduce another level of convoluted bureaucracy. Requests will be rejected if a public official can prove they come from people working for the same legal body. How will they define who works for the same organisation? Well now we know. They will draft in a contingent of officials (paid for by you and I) to decide how to classify requesters. What a great way to waste time and money.

Written answers
Thursday, 8 February 2007

Vera Baird (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs) – My Department will publish comprehensive guidance on any changes to the Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations, including on how to exercise discretion in deciding if a person is acting in concert or in pursuance of a campaign.

The Cabinet Office has shut down its previous email address for receiving FOI queries with no forwarding address according to Spyblog. The new email address is: foiteam@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk

The mailing address remains:
FOI Team
Cabinet Office
Room 118
70 Whitehall
London SW1A 2AS

This recent curtailment of a generic email inbox (Identity & Passport Agency has done the same thing) shows the need for individual accountability. It is much more difficult to get rid of an actual person than a generic email address. For that reason, I always provide named FOI officers in my book.